So this post is going to be a little less refined; more thinking and typing without the aid of reason, editing, or even fully developed linear thoughts. So hang in there if you chose to keep reading and respond with your own thoughts, questions, or feel free to push back on things you don’t agree with.

At what point in our lives have we formed our core opinions, decisions, or values that will then inherently drive the rest of our lives? This must occur at some point, that we make a choice or arrive at core conviction on something or many things and this affects how we view things we encounter. This can be as small as a dislike for cooked carrots or as large as your religious faith. Either way, there is a moment or many individual moments that direct your future understanding, opinions, and decisions.

Now here’s another question, is this good or bad, or can it be both. Can my personal dislike for cooked carrots be valid or prejudice? See, as a child I was forced to eat them and I hated the consistency the . That mushy gushy feeling in my mouth makes me want to vomit. And from that one incident I now have a dislike for all things mushy and gushy, which also leads to my assuming something is mushy and gushy and deciding that I will not like it. I reach this absolute decision without trying the food in question to confirm that I’d would not like it.

Or, take for instance an author, speaker, etc. If I have read an author or heard a speaker before and agreed with or liked what they had to say, I assume that I’ll also agree with or like their other works and will seek them out again. Yet, the opposite is true. Also, if there are certain ideas or truths that I’ve accepted and taken as my own core beliefs I will weigh and evaluate other people’s opinions, thoughts, or written works through the prejudice of those beliefs.

Another example from my own life. I read the book On the Road by Jack Kerouac in college and hated it. I was disturbed by the main character’s utter disinterest in any type of responsibility or authority, his selfishness and self involvement, and just the path of people he left in his wake as he searched for the meaning of life or his next high. To this day, I have feelings of disgust and dislike toward the book and the work. And yet on a trip to the New York Public Library I saw an exhibit about Jack Kerouac, with the original scroll on which he wrote On the Road, and his life and while I still had those feelings of dislike for his written works and even his own life choices, I was interested in a celebrated, by some, writer and the story of his life.

So is all prejudice bad?

Of course that word brings with it considerable baggage, as it probably should. And yet, I’m prejudice against cooked carrots and Jack Kerouac. I won’t eat the carrots and I won’t read any other works of Kerouac. Is that wrong? Or have I formed an opinion on my own experiences.

Now, this isn’t to say that my opinions are always formed on truth. Because while I might have the option to dislike cooked carrots because I have tried them, can I then judge any other cooked vegetable based on that one experience? A silly example I realize, so let’s look at Jack Kerouac. Since I’ve read and determined my opinion for On the Road can I form an opinion on the rest of the works of Kerouac, or for that matter other Beat movement authors? Can I, or more should I be prejudice toward another author because of my already informed opinion about one in the same movement?

How about a different spin on this idea. Can I read a book, any book, with a truly open mind? Or do I come to things with an already formed opinion about them, in some small form at least, based on my personally held convictions, opinions, and values? And if I do try to read something with an open mind, will I bristle at the things that peak my negative opinions and embrace without much thought those things that I already hold at true?

Can we view things with discernment and yet without prejudice? Are those two things the same or different or are they somehow connected and yet separate?

Working at a church, being in the Christian culture, and having lots of conversations with college kids I’ve often head the words “I was challenged by this or that”. Part of me now wonders if we are really challenged or are we just continually justified in our already held beliefs. For something to truly challenge you, shouldn’t it rock something deep within you, or spur you on to change a deep-seeded behavior or belief, shouldn’t it shock your preconceived notion about whatever it is that the challenge rises from? Or do we use the word “challenged” because it’s what we think we’re supposed to say?

I’m not saying that we should question every single value or conviction we hold. Those are huge pillars in our life that form who we are, what we think, and how we live. But is discernment looking at everything we encounter (the things we like, dislike, embrace, and reject) and holding them to a standard that is above our own preconceived opinions and testing them to something that is solid and true. What is truth then? Is it my own version of what I believe, or does it rest outside of me and I’m broken upon it time and again until those values, opinions, and beliefs become something that is less “me” and more “truth”?

Ok, I need to think about this more. Sorry if you’re lost or left hanging. I’d love to hear your thoughts. As I said, this is “in process” and much more rough than refined.

Ok, I’m admitting it, I’m minorly obsessed with Lost.

Now there are some limits to this obsession, case in point: I don’t cruise the MANY fan sites, I don’t have a screen name like Oceanicgal or Lostie7, I don’t hit Amazon.com the moment after the show airs to buy any work of literature (or comic book) mentioned. But I do read two websites about the show, one is ew.com and the other is a blog by people who seem to be just like me, entranced by the story but not overly geekified. I also have a good group of friends who will banter with me about theories, plot lines, and our predictions of how it will all end.

Now, there is ONE thing that might push me over the edge into a form of geekiness that is, well, let’s just call it the upper level of nerddom. I have this idea of something to do between the end of this season and the beginning of the next, the FINAL season where all loose ends will be tied up and all our questions will hopefully be answered.

Since I love puzzles and figuring out problems my plan is this: I will watch the prior seasons of LOST and see anew each ep (I use this term for episode because I was told it makes me sound cool and trust me I need all the cool points I can get) with the knowledge I now have. I will also, wait for it here comes the geeky part, takes notes on questions, facts, new plot developments, character connections, and all those little tidbits that I missed along the way OR are huge now in light of future events.

Ok, take a moment and laugh at me, you know you want to.

When I mentioned this to my co-workers, some of which are fellow Lost-watchers and others who are missing out on the amazingness that is this show, they laughed. It’s ok, I have a pretty good sense of self worth when it comes to my nerdy tendencies. Then they asked if I was going to turn all John Nash from A Beautiful Mind and have my apartment walls covered in theories and time lines and flow charts. Well not my apartment walls . . . . that’s what notebooks are for. I did give them permission to stage an intervention if I started talking about my “friend” Dave who helps me with my theories. (BTW – that was a fun little Lost reference for those of you who might share my obsession and if you don’t it’s just more fuel for the fire that I’m a nerd).

So that’s the plan, we’ll see if it happens. Either way I love the show, I love the stories, and I’m obsessed with figuring out the mysteries that surround the story. I think when it comes down to it, I just like problems or riddles that require you to notice small things, connect random dots, and buy into the story to understand the solution.

A recent college grad I’ve known for the last year was picking my brain on blogging. She expressed interest in having a blog but worried about who would see what she wrote. See, she wanted to write about the experience of planning a wedding: the good, the bad, and the often ugly (yes horrendous bridesmaid dresses that rain down horror and ill-fittingness I’m pointing my finger at you). She was trying to balance the catharsis of talking about the craziness of wedding planning with not hurting anyone’s feelings. I suggested having a blog without her name attached and telling no one about it. And then she said the all too true statement of “But then no one will read it.”

Even in this world where people can expose their thoughts with almost total anonymity we still want to be heard. Even if what we have to say might hurt someone’s feelings or generally piss off a whole other group of people we still want our thoughts to be heard and received. We want the truth of what we think or feel or are dealing with to be known by others.

And there is the trade-off. If you really want what you have to say to be heard you have to give up some of your anonymity. You have to deal with the fall-out of letting others into your thoughts and opinions. Sometimes the price is worth it because you were able to speak what was once unspoken and share what was true to you; but other times the cost is high, too high, and we mute our voices and hold back out thoughts.

How does this play out in real life, outside the blog? What is the cost to returns equation that keeps us silent or pushes us to open our mouths? And is that how we should decide to speak up? Should speaking up or sharing an opinion be based on the reaction we anticipate it receiving or should it be based on something more: truth, honesty, openness, and vulnerability?

Is anonymity good or is it something we hide behind so we don’t have to expose our true selves or maybe just even truth?

So after two and a half years in FW, I realized I’ve squelched my inner monologue that once poored forth so freely on this blog. I’m not sure if it’s a lack of subject matter or time, or more just a lack of putting effort into writing out my thoughts, but whatever the reason I’m committing to start posting again. This blog was always more about a place to write that continual conversation that happens in my head between me and myself and have some sort of evidence of what I was processing at the moment. So here goes, a choice to start writing again. We’ll see what happens when I start letting the conversations and thoughts transfer to the page.

On my last trip to Target (they happen often so I probably should mention this was trip three in as many days) I was struck with a thought: Our world is slowly being taken over by 100 calories. Almost every snack or food item is now neatly packaged in a 100 calorie pack. On your next shopping trip look at the astounding number of items that blazenly state they’re 100 calories.

Who am I kidding? My pantry is made up of these centennial packs. I sustain myself by the 100 calorie item. See, I’ve recently taken to recording my food consumption and those little packs are nifty and easy to use. 100 calories here or there make for a quick indulgence in chocolate or marshmallows or salty chips and it’s easy to plug them into my iphone log. Wow, I guess I just realized I’m a techie calorie counter.

So now I’m wondering if the 100 pack will extend past the shopping aisles into other things? What if restaurants start offering 100 calorie portions? Or recipes tell you have many 100 calorie servings there are? How great would it be if every bit of food I ate came in 100 calorie portions, bites, or packages.

Hmm, maybe this is evidence of my organized/number crunching/pieces fitting together obsession or maybe the world is becoming one big 100 calorie pack.